Tol-in-Gaurhoth CIII: Big Magic in Middle Earth Arcane Encampment (Game Thread)

[Thinlómien]

Haa, great to be here and playing again. Honestly, we should have more games and someone should force me to visit the 'Downs at least once per two weeks or something, because this is ridiculous. Anyway, nice to see everyone. *waves*

And Holby! I almost got a heart-attack when I saw you signed up. Always wonderful to see old faces back. And welcome and enjoy being dead - though hopefully not too soon in this particular game - to Echo!

Originally Posted by Zil

Also, a friendly reminder to all and sundry that Invisibility is advised.

Now this made me think that Zil's gone through people's profiles one by one seeing who's been online when. Why don't I have any problem imagining this...

Originally Posted by Nerwen

The Rule of Three...

Zil, Cop, Lottie...

Our First Three! I wonder which is the wolf– er I mean, evil sorcerer.

Aren't they all wolves in about 2/3 of the games anyway?

The only thing that's raised my eyebrows this far is Cop taking the post quoted above seriously, but that's not very much. Gosh, I wish Nogrod was here to start the serious talk for us.


PS. As for the ones quiet this far, Greenie is sitting next to me and typing a post at this very moment, and Kath and Legate too know that the game has started but haven't got up yet.


edit: xed with Greenie, she was faster than me hmph!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

The Rule of Three, Nerwen? I don't think I've heard of that one before. Does it mean that as a rule of thumb, there'll be a sorcerer in the first three posters of each game?

Not a rule of thumb, but just based on probability, I would say (especially in smaller games). I think I recall it happening very often. Usually, the WWs also feel some "moral obligation" to post (I mean, there are "unsporty" wolves as well, but I think mostly WWs are like that they don't want to purposefully abstain for a day unless they are forced to, since it'd be unfair), if they are around, in case they won't be around later. So if a WW is around in early stages of the game, I think it's more likely they post than not. Also, the earlier the post, the more banter you can write (but I guess it depends on the Wolf if he/she is a under-the-radar-substanceless-posts-posting one or if he/she prefers to write things with actual content, such WWs probably prefer to write more once the actual discussion starts).

Originally Posted by Cop

I'm so tired of suspecting Inzil and thinking "he can't be a wolf yet again, can he?". I think he turned out to be a wolf in all three of the games I've played with him before.$

Originally Posted by A Little Green

*sigh* Back at the Rule of Three, are we? The trouble with Inzil is that he is a wolf improbably often, and when he isn't he still acts in the exact same manner!

Actually, I had the same idea after reading the first post, which on first sight (before I read anything else) felt like "ha, is he behaving like a Zilwolf"? But exactly the trouble is, he hasn't been a nonzilwolf for a while, so it's hard to say. However, on second look, I don't think Zil's post is actually in any way Wolf-seeming.

Nothing struck me weird on Lottie, if so, then rather about Cop. The flip-floppy chitter-chatter, especially if any of the other ones is also a Wolf (namely, Zil), because it doesn't sound like totally useless banter, but sounds like it might have a purpose (to seem like it's banter, while talking about Wolves, or even if there were two of them, then to seem like banter while talking about packmates).

The amount of these in Greenie's post seems a bit excessive; if anything disturbs me, it is actually her. But it is also the general paranoia, since we recently talked about what would it be like, once the game starts, if three of us were Wolves and only one innocent (as mentioned above, there is currently Greenie, Lommy, Kath and me in the same place). Speaking of which, Lommy seems to me the most innocentish of all the people so far.

Anyway, somebody mentioned the strategy of getting rid of Saruman first of all; clearly that is the best course. But we can't figure out (I assume) who is Saruman and who is "ordinary baddie", so the subject simply comes down to basic Wolf-hunt. Sorry, Sorcerer-hunt.

Now off to finish my breakfast and I'll check back later

[Kath]

Can't believe Nogrod isn't in this game - who else is going to be so pleased at the fact that, given I am currently staying with 5 other Downers, there's no way I can forget the game has started! I'm with Lommy - there should definitely be something that prods you back to the 'Downs every week or so.

To the game! Admin thread says only that the number of wolves will be determined by the number of players. Given we have few players I wouldn't have thought we would have more than 3 wolves, particularly with this chance to add another to the pack later on. Presumably this will come clear in the narration though so little point worrying yet. We still need to aim to catch any wolf!

Is there any knowledge on whether double lynches might happen? I looked through the admin thread but couldn't see anything. May be me being stupid though.

I have no scary notices at the moment. But do remember to copy posts before trying to submit them just in case! (Copying now. )

[Coppermirror]

Finally, more people! I'll have to go to sleep very soon, but it's a relief that people know the game is on.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

As for Lottie - well, I think we've tried the "lynch Lottie on Day 1" -strategy a couple of times before...

Why would Lottie be someone who frequently gets lynched on day 1? I can't quite remember if this topic got brought up in a previous game or not.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Aren't they all wolves in about 2/3 of the games anyway?

Heeeey, you are impugning my almost spotless record of innocence! Prior to this game my ratio of wolfhood was 1/4. (Now 1/5)

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

The only thing that's raised my eyebrows this far is Cop taking the post quoted above seriously, but that's not very much. Gosh, I wish Nogrod was here to start the serious talk for us.

It's not that I was taking it seriously per se but that it's better to talk on Day 1 and see where the conversation may go. The worst situation is if nobody says anything, after all.

By now, rule of three or no rule of three, we've had eight people posting by now, and that means there's bound to be at least one wolf who's posted, and maybe more.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Anyway, somebody mentioned the strategy of getting rid of Saruman first of all; clearly that is the best course.

I agree that that would be the ideal strategy even if there are doubts about how it would work, but actually you're the first person to propose the strategy. Earlier people were debating the merits of going for Saruman versus also going for, um, Serverman, Lord of the Code.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Nothing struck me weird on Lottie, if so, then rather about Cop. The flip-floppy chitter-chatter, especially if any of the other ones is also a Wolf (namely, Zil), because it doesn't sound like totally useless banter, but sounds like it might have a purpose (to seem like it's banter, while talking about Wolves, or even if there were two of them, then to seem like banter while talking about packmates).

Legate, could you tell me what sort of hidden talking-to-wolves conversation you think could have been hidden in the banter between me and Inzil earlier? Now, I know there is no message, and personally I can't see potential for interpreting the posts in that way either, but I'm deeply interested in what you think it could have been, in the sense that I'm wondering whether you're a sorcerer and you already know there isn't one.

[satansaloser2005]

I put in a temporary "narration" telling you the number of sorcerers. Enjoy.

I will be at work until deadline. If you have a question, PM me and I'll check the Downs from my phone a few times during the day. If you need something urgent, please have Shasta or Boro text me.


P.S. DEPRECATE! DEPRECATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Holbytlass]

i have been gone long in my travels and only now return.
some are known but most aren't.

i did want to come to the village square and say hello before returning to my humble abode and unpack and think and become paranoid and....

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

Why would Lottie be someone who frequently gets lynched on day 1? I can't quite remember if this topic got brought up in a previous game or not.

Lottie did through a period where she got lynched early a lot. It happens. The “why” is not so easy to determine...

But I don’t really like the way Greenie just points out Lottie's track record as a default lynch– without saying what she thinks of her this time. Or the way Cop picks up on it, for that matter.

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

Heeeey, you are impugning my almost spotless record of innocence! Prior to this game my ratio of wolfhood was 1/4. (Now 1/5)

Well, of course– you’re a sorcerer this time, right, Cop?
EDIT: X’d with Kath.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Legate

Not a rule of thumb, but just based on probability, I would say (especially in smaller games). I think I recall it happening very often. Usually, the WWs also feel some "moral obligation" to post (I mean, there are "unsporty" wolves as well, but I think mostly WWs are like that they don't want to purposefully abstain for a day unless they are forced to, since it'd be unfair), if they are around, in case they won't be around later. So if a WW is around in early stages of the game, I think it's more likely they post than not. Also, the earlier the post, the more banter you can write (but I guess it depends on the Wolf if he/she is a under-the-radar-substanceless-posts-posting one or if he/she prefers to write things with actual content, such WWs probably prefer to write more once the actual discussion starts).

What? Are you actually treating the rule of three as a serious theory? That's the fishiest thing I've seen today. The rule of three is utter made-up rubbish based on probabilities. I mean, yes, if we are 14 and there are 3 wolves, it's quite likely there is a wolf among the three first posters, but the probability is no bigger than there being a wolf among any given three players - say the three first in alphabetical order (in his case A Little Green, Boro and Coppermirror). There's no point in basing any suspicions on the rule of three.

Originally Posted by Kath

Is there any knowledge on whether double lynches might happen? I looked through the admin thread but couldn't see anything. May be me being stupid though.

Since there's nothing, we can quite safely assume there are none, that has been the trend recently. But [B]alittleimpishdevilsthemoddess2005[B], what happens in the case of a tie?

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

Heeeey, you are impugning my almost spotless record of innocence! Prior to this game my ratio of wolfhood was 1/4. (Now 1/5)

Fair enough, your wolfiness just left a strong impression on me then. The clarification about your wolfhood ratio was quite unnecessary though.

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

By now, rule of three or no rule of three, we've had eight people posting by now, and that means there's bound to be at least one wolf who's posted, and maybe more.

Okay kids, let Lommy teach you some maths. It is probable that one or two wolves have posted by now, but they are in no means bound to have posted yet since there are six people who haven't posted yet and we have three wolves. Ergo, it's totally possible our wolves are among those who haven't still posted.

Originally Posted by Cop

Earlier people were debating the merits of going for Saruman versus also going for, um, Serverman, Lord of the Code.

edit: wow, a crowd! xed with everyone after Kath

[Kath]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

Finally, more people! I'll have to go to sleep very soon, but it's a relief that people know the game is on.



Why would Lottie be someone who frequently gets lynched on day 1? I can't quite remember if this topic got brought up in a previous game or not.



Heeeey, you are impugning my almost spotless record of innocence! Prior to this game my ratio of wolfhood was 1/4. (Now 1/5)



It's not that I was taking it seriously per se but that it's better to talk on Day 1 and see where the conversation may go. The worst situation is if nobody says anything, after all.

By now, rule of three or no rule of three, we've had eight people posting by now, and that means there's bound to be at least one wolf who's posted, and maybe more.



I agree that that would be the ideal strategy even if there are doubts about how it would work, but actually you're the first person to propose the strategy. Earlier people were debating the merits of going for Saruman versus also going for, um, Serverman, Lord of the Code.



Legate, could you tell me what sort of hidden talking-to-wolves conversation you think could have been hidden in the banter between me and Inzil earlier? Now, I know there is no message, and personally I can't see potential for interpreting the posts in that way either, but I'm deeply interested in what you think it could have been, in the sense that I'm wondering whether you're a sorcerer and you already know there isn't one.

I don't quite understand this last sentence Cop. We know there is a sorcerer surely. Either from sally's original admin thread or then definitely from her added narration. So why would Legate know that there isn't a sorcerer? Or do you mean that he knows there isn't one amongst you and Inzil - because he is the sorcerer.

Also I just spelled sorcerer wrong about three times - Aganzir had to correct me!

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Kath

I don't quite understand this last sentence Cop. We know there is a sorcerer surely. Either from sally's original admin thread or then definitely from her added narration. So why would Legate know that there isn't a sorcerer? Or do you mean that he knows there isn't one amongst you and Inzil - because he is the sorcerer.

Kath, pretty sure she means “there isn’t a message”.

[Coppermirror]

Originally Posted by Kath

I don't quite understand this last sentence Cop. We know there is a sorcerer surely. Either from sally's original admin thread or then definitely from her added narration. So why would Legate know that there isn't a sorcerer? Or do you mean that he knows there isn't one amongst you and Inzil - because he is the sorcerer.

Oh, sorry, I see how that could be misleading. By "one" I meant a hidden conversation about sorcerers between sorcerers such as Legate appeared to be speculating was there in the banter. So what I was wondering about was whether Legate's speculation was legitimate or whether he's a sorcerer and already knows there isn't a hidden conversation there. Which led me to want to know what Legate thought the content of such a hidden conversation might have been and where in the posts it was, as I don't understand what he could have genuinely taken as such a conversation.

Edit: crossed with Nerwen twice.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

I suppose we'll find out from the narration, but right now I don't have much better to discuss, so I might as well. Four makes some sense, but Saruman has his one-shot power as well. That might cause there to be one less, perhaps. But that said, Saruman's power to convert people is very limited in scope.

Moddess has now indicated there are three baddies, including Saruman. Was it Greenie who said not knowing the number could be a sign of innocence? Could be. Anyway, I like Greenie thus far.

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

Anyway, assuming four sorcerers, we have five gifted (including the lovers), and five ordos (if one can call such fine magic users ordinary!). An interesting combination.

As for the Lovers, I would guess the requirement for them to win is as usual: they both have to survive. That means they can't be counted on by either the baddies or the village. Something to keep in mind.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Now this made me think that Zil's gone through people's profiles one by one seeing who's been online when. Why don't I have any problem imagining this...

Nothing so time-consuming. Before I posted I saw someone uncloaked. There must be standards of decency.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Anyway, somebody mentioned the strategy of getting rid of Saruman first of all; clearly that is the best course. But we can't figure out (I assume) who is Saruman and who is "ordinary baddie", so the subject simply comes down to basic Wolf-hunt. Sorry, Sorcerer-hunt.

Indeed. Unless Saruman happens to be scried in the Night I don't see how s(he)'s going to be distinguishable from the other evildoers. I wonder if Saruman would show as such to the Seer anyway.

x/d with Nerwen x 2 and Cop

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

Legate, could you tell me what sort of hidden talking-to-wolves conversation you think could have been hidden in the banter between me and Inzil earlier? Now, I know there is no message, and personally I can't see potential for interpreting the posts in that way either, but I'm deeply interested in what you think it could have been, in the sense that I'm wondering whether you're a sorcerer and you already know there isn't one.

Nope, I said nothing about wolf-to-wolf messages. I was simply musing on the idea of the rule of Three, and (independantly of that) posing the idea whether any of those already posting sound Wolvish. I didn't mean that it sounds like you and Zil would be giving messages to each other, but simply that you sound like somebody who is posting "avoidingly" (see my post above for description), and that it would also be possible that you would be acting that way if you and Zil both were wolves. Purely theoretical thoughts, but what now actually seems fishy to me is your reaction to it. Your last post really does seem like that of a sort of "responsive" Wolf (as in, a Wolf who immediately snaps back at the moment somebody only slightly accidentally brushes it with a ten-foot pole).

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Indeed. Unless Saruman happens to be scried in the Night I don't see how s(he)'s going to be distinguishable from the other evildoers. I wonder if Saruman would show as such to the Seer anyway.

Good question, maybe that is something the Mod could answer as well. Because otherwise the fact that there is a Saruman is not really of much relevance to us, or, as in, we can't do anything about it. Well, if we learned about that, we'd simply lynch him anyway, but just for the sake of knowing... But let's not get tangled into this.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

What? Are you actually treating the rule of three as a serious theory? That's the fishiest thing I've seen today. The rule of three is utter made-up rubbish based on probabilities. I mean, yes, if we are 14 and there are 3 wolves, it's quite likely there is a wolf among the three first posters, but the probability is no bigger than there being a wolf among any given three players - say the three first in alphabetical order (in his case A Little Green, Boro and Coppermirror). There's no point in basing any suspicions on the rule of three.

What? No! I was saying actually the exact opposite. I was saying that it is not a rule, of of course (look at the very first sentence I said!), and cannot be treated as such (I mean, who would be so stupid to think that? Obviously, if all the Wolves are living in some faraway timezone and are still sleeping or something, then of course they won't be posting!). But I was mostly explaining and then using my experience to point out that actually WWs might very often post among the first people, and giving reasons why they might do it if they are around. Probability, that's all. And I said even nothing about first three, I was speaking about "first posters" in general (indefinite number). Simply, that it is likely there have been at least some Wolves posting up to now, and that I think (emphasis on that I only think) that Wolves tend to post early, if they are around (if they are "being sporty" and feeling the moral obligation to speak). That's all.

EDIT: x-posted with Echo, whom I guess nobody here has played with, so I am hoping to see more from her/him to get a better idea about it (anyway, I guess I won't be at least voting for a newbie on the first Day, as I believe is a custom most people here hold anyway... that doesn't mean you can't be suspected though, Echo!)

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Legate

What? No! I was saying actually the exact opposite. I was saying that it is not a rule, of of course (look at the very first sentence I said!), and cannot be treated as such (I mean, who would be so stupid to think that? Obviously, if all the Wolves are living in some faraway timezone and are still sleeping or something, then of course they won't be posting!). But I was mostly explaining and then using my experience to point out that actually WWs might very often post among the first people, and giving reasons why they might do it if they are around. Probability, that's all. And I said even nothing about first three, I was speaking about "first posters" in general (indefinite number). Simply, that it is likely there have been at least some Wolves posting up to now, and that I think (emphasis on that I only think) that Wolves tend to post early, if they are around (if they are "being sporty" and feeling the moral obligation to speak). That's all.

This confuses me. You first say that the Rule of Three doesn't work, and then proceed to explain why it does work? Even your less extreme version of the Rule of Three -logic looks problematic to me. I think (or at least hope) that all players feel a moral obligation to contribute early in the game if they are around, so I don't really see how that applies to wolves more than others.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Lottie did through a period where she got lynched early a lot. It happens. The “why” is not so easy to determine...

But I don’t really like the way Greenie just points out Lottie's track record as a default lynch– without saying what she thinks of her this time. Or the way Cop picks up on it, for that matter.

A random observation, if you want the honest answer. It was pretty much the first thing that occurred to me when Cop mentioned that Lottie would be his pick if he had to name a wolf among the first three posters. (As in, "Oh dear, here we go again. Haven't we seen this before?") And for the record, I think she looks fine this far.

Other than that, I'm liking Lommy this far and feeling more comfortable with Inzil than usual.

[Kath]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

A random observation, if you want the honest answer.

As opposed to an untruthful one?

Greenie though, I don't think that Legate is being problematic with his explanation of the Rule of Three. That 'rule' suggests that one of the first three posters must be a wolf. Legate does not say that, but says that sometimes a bold wolf may be an early poster. Therefore one of the first three posters may be a wolf but it does not necessarily hold that they are a wolf. At least that's how I read what he is saying.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

This confuses me. You first say that the Rule of Three doesn't work, and then proceed to explain why it does work? Even your less extreme version of the Rule of Three -logic looks problematic to me. I think (or at least hope) that all players feel a moral obligation to contribute early in the game if they are around, so I don't really see how that applies to wolves more than others.

I’m confused too– but maybe he just means “if a wolf has already posted..."

Note to newbies (and others), since this is becoming an issue: the Rule of Three is just a joke, not a valid reason for suspecting anyone.

(It does have its uses– talking about it has been known to provoke some interesting reactions...)

Originally Posted by Greenie

A random observation, if you want the honest answer. It was pretty much the first thing that occurred to me when Cop mentioned that Lottie would be his pick if he had to name a wolf among the first three posters. (As in, "Oh dear, here we go again. Haven't we seen this before?") And for the record, I think she looks fine this far.

Fair enough. Coppermirror is a “she”, by the way.

EDIT: X’d with Kath.